Tag "Scientist"

Climate alarmists tell us that the Earth has never been warmer, and that we can tell by looking at tree rings, treelines, and other proxy indicators of climate.
Yet nature seems to not be paying attention to such pronouncements, as this discovery shows.
This photo shows a tree stump of White Spruce that was radiocarbon dated at 5000 years old.
It was located 100 km north of the current tree line in extreme Northwest Canada.
The area is now frozen tundra, but it was once warm enough to support significant tree growth like this.
If climate was this warm in the past, how did that happen before we started using the fossil fuels that supposedly made our current climate unprecedentedly warm?
By Jim Steele Good news continues to accumulate regards corals’ ability to rapidly adjust to changing climates.
The view of coral resilience has been dominated by the narrative of a few scientists.
In the 1990s they advocated devastating consequences for coral reefs due to global warming, arguing coral cannot adapt quickly enough.
Since the Little…

More than 5 million birds from at least 250 different species fly through the Windy City’s downtown every fall and spring.
Deadly appetite: 10 animals we are eating into extinction Read more The famous skyline of Manhattan is another death trap for birds, especially those migrating.
“They wind up landing somewhere that’s unfamiliar, like a sidewalk somewhere,” said Susan Elbin, director of conservation and science at New York City Audubon, a leading bird advocacy organization.
Any city with glass structures and bright lights at night is a culprit, but some are more dangerous to birds than others.
The Cornell Lab of Ornithology published a study this week that ranks cities based on the danger they pose to migrating birds.
Houston and Dallas, which also lie along some of the most popular migration paths, round out the top three most deadly cities after Chicago.
“We’re trying to raise awareness – trying to provide data and insight that could help,” he said.
The organization estimates about 90,000 to 200,000 birds are killed via building collision in the city each year.
Local Audubon chapters and other bird conservation groups around the country coordinate similar data collection exercises.
Conservationists also advocate that buildings adopt more “bird-friendly” designs, for example using patterned glass and dimmer lighting.

Afterwards, the ocean’s overturning circulation distributes it: ocean currents and mixing processes transport the dissolved CO2 from the surface deep into the ocean’s interior, where it accumulates over time.
The size of this sink is very important for the atmospheric CO2 levels: without this sink, the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere and the extent of anthropogenic climate change would be considerably higher. “Over the examined period, the global ocean continued to take up anthropogenic CO2 at a rate that is congruent with the increase of atmospheric CO2 ,” Gruber explains.
The North Atlantic Ocean, for instance, absorbed 20 per cent less CO2 than expected between 1994 and 2007. “This is probably due to the slowdown of the North Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation in the late 1990s, which itself is most likely a consequence of climate variability,” Gruber explains.
Gruber emphasises: “We learned that the marine sink does not just respond to the increase in atmospheric CO2.
Using observations obtained from the very first global CO2 survey conducted between the late 1980s and the mid-1990s, that study estimated that the ocean had taken up around 118 gigatonnes of carbon from the beginning of industrialisation around 1800 until 1994.
Increasing CO2 content acidifies marine habitats By moderating the rate of global warming, the oceanic sink for man-made CO2 provides an important service for humanity, but it has its price: the CO2 dissolved in the ocean acidifies the water. “Our data has shown that this acidification reaches deep into the ocean’s interior, extending in part to depths of more than 3000 m,” Gruber says.
Gruber is convinced: “Documenting the chemical changes imparted on the ocean as a result of human activity is crucial, not least to understand the impact of these changes on marine life.”

Scientists use the deep-diving robot Jason to collect water samples from oceanic crust at a subseafloor observatory off the coast of Washington.
A recent study found that a group of unusual microbes living below the seafloor provides clues to the evolution of life on Earth, and potentially other planets.
Researchers used cutting-edge molecular methods to study these microbes, which thrive in the hot, oxygen-free fluids that flow through Earth’s crust.
Called Hydrothermarchaeota, this group of microbes lives in such an extreme environment that they have never been cultivated in a laboratory for study.
A research team from Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, and the Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute bypassed the problem of cultivation with genetic sequencing methods called genomics, a suite of novel techniques used to sequence large groups of genetic information.
They found that Hydrothermarchaeota may obtain energy by processing carbon monoxide and sulfate, which is an overlooked metabolic strategy.
Analyzing Hydrothermarchaeota genomes revealed that these microbes belong to the group of single-celled life known as archaea and evolved early in the history of life on Earth — as did their unusual metabolic processes. “Studying these unique microbes can give us insights into both the history of Earth and the potential strategies of life on other planets,” said Stephanie Carr, first author on the paper and a former postdoctoral researcher with Orcutt who is now an assistant professor at Hartwick College. “Their survival strategies make them incredibly versatile, and they play an important, overlooked role in the subsurface environments where they live.”
Working in partnership with the Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, the researchers sorted and analyzed the microbes in the Single Cell Genomics Center at Bigelow Laboratory.

From The Daily Caller Michael Bastasch | Energy Editor New evidence suggests climate model predictions are way off when it comes to the Gulf Stream.
New evidence casts further doubt on model-based predictions that global warming could halt the Gulf Stream currents as part of an alarming scenario that inspired the 2004 disaster film, “The Day After Tomorrow.” For years, scientists warned global warming could halt the Atlantic’s “conveyor belt” and foment extreme weather and raise sea levels from North America to Europe.
That prediction is based on climate models that, the new study found, may be analyzing the wrong thing.
Lozier’s study found that climate models overestimate the role of the Labrador Sea west of Greenland in the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation (AMOC).
Scientists Are Pushing Back) Jake Gyllenhaal (L) and Emmy Rossum, cast members in the motion picture ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ pose during a photocall in Berlin May 5, 2004.
Observational data is available for the Gulf Stream closer to the U.S., which brings warm water north.
A 2014 study examining actual measurements taken off the U.S. coast found “absolutely no evidence that suggests that the Gulf Stream is slowing down,” its lead author said.
The AMOC is like a conveyor belt that brings warm, salty water north towards Greenland where it’s mixed with fresher cold water.
Climate models generally predict warming will weaken the AMOC, but observational evidence has been scant.
Lozier’s study provides further evidence that climate models may be wrong on more than just temperature rise.

This story was originally published by the HuffPost and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
Ocean temperatures are rising faster than scientists previously concluded, according to an alarming report released Thursday.
The research, published in the journal Science, said that scientists found several inaccuracies with the way ocean temperatures were previously measured and that warming levels for the past few decades were actually greater than what scientists found in 2013.
The report also found that the warming rate has accelerated since 1991.
Emissions in the United States jumped 3.4 percent last year from 2017 — the second-largest annual increase in more than two decades, according to a preliminary estimate by the economic research company Rhodium Group.
The Science report linked the warming to more rain, increased sea levels, coral reef destruction, declining ocean oxygen levels, and declines in ice sheets, glaciers, and ice caps in polar environments.
“The fairly steady rise in OHC [ocean heat content] shows that the planet is clearly warming,” the report stated, adding that rising sea levels and temperatures should be concerning, “given the abundant evidence of effects on storms, hurricanes, and the hydrological cycle, including extreme precipitation events.” The report calculates two scenarios depicting significant warming this century.
The first scenario falls in line with the Paris Climate Agreement’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to keep the average global temperature from rising no more than 2 degrees C (3.6 degrees F) above preindustrial levels.
The U.S. joined the deal last month despite President Donald Trump’s 2017 pledge to withdraw the country from the Paris accord.
The U.S. may not withdraw from the agreement until 2020.

Ocean temperatures are rising faster than scientists previously concluded, according to an alarming report released Thursday.
The research, published in the journal Science, said that scientists found several inaccuracies with the way ocean temperatures were previously measured and that warming levels for the past few decades were actually greater than what scientists found in 2013.
“Recent observation-based estimates show rapid warming of Earth’s oceans,” read the report, which used four independent studies to track ocean heat content from 1971 to 2010.
Emissions in the United States jumped 3.4 percent last year from 2017 — the second-largest annual increase in more than two decades, according to a preliminary estimate by the economic research company Rhodium Group.
The Science report linked the warming to more rain, increased sea levels, coral reef destruction, declining ocean oxygen levels and declines in ice sheets, glaciers and ice caps in polar environments.
“The fairly steady rise in OHC [ocean heat content] shows that the planet is clearly warming,” the report stated, adding that rising sea levels and temperatures should be concerning, “given the abundant evidence of effects on storms, hurricanes and the hydrological cycle, including extreme precipitation events.” The report calculates two scenarios depicting significant warming this century.
The first scenario falls in line with the Paris Climate Agreement’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to keep the average global temperature from rising no more than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
The second scenario assumes no change in emissions and projects warming that could severely affect ocean ecosystems and sea levels.
The U.S. joined the deal last month despite President Donald Trump’s 2017 pledge to withdraw the country from the Paris accord.
The U.S. may not withdraw from the agreement until 2020.

When queried about the most recent IPCC report, Republican lawmakers delivered a consistent, false message – that climate scientists are still debating whether humans are responsible.
As Nasa atmospheric scientist Kate Marvel recently put it, “We are more sure that greenhouse gas is causing climate change than we are that smoking causes cancer.” Donald Trump articulated the incorrect Republican position in an interview on 60 Minutes: We have scientists that disagree with [human-caused global warming] … You’d have to show me the [mainstream] scientists because they have a very big political agenda To paraphrase, ‘I know scientists.
I have the best scientists.’ And of course Trump thinks he has “a natural instinct for science” which, as astrophysicist Katie Mack noted, is not a thing: Katie Mack (@AstroKatie) There is no “natural instinct for science.”
Believing in a “natural instinct for science” is anathema to everything science is October 17, 2018 Americans badly underestimate the expert climate consensus Numerous papers have shown that over 90% of climate science experts agree that humans are the main cause of global warming since 1950, and when considering peer-reviewed papers, the consensus exceeds 97%.
Three other Americas – the Cautious, the Disengaged, and the Doubtful – represent different stages of understanding and acceptance of the problem, and none are actively involved.
However, the important finding in the Yale and George Mason survey is that even Americans who are Alarmed and Concerned about climate change badly underestimate the level of expert agreement on its human cause.
However, numerous social science papers have found that the perceived consensus acts as a “gateway belief,” meaning that when people are aware of the high level of expert agreement on human-caused global warming, they’re more likely to accept that reality and support policies to address the problem.
The Yale and George Mason data also support the notion that political polarization isn’t the only problem here.
If it were, the Alarmed and Concerned would realize there’s a 97% expert consensus on human-caused global warming.
And in a follow-up study, the scientists showed that consensus messaging also increased acceptance of human-caused global warming, even among conservatives.

Dr. Pittman is an Associate Researcher at the University of Plymouth in the UK and Director of Seascape Analytics.
It features contributions on topics such as marine protected area (MPA) design, ecological connectivity, seascape mapping and modelling, pelagic seascapes, seascape economics and holistic systems science.
Dr. Pittman has been working in and around MPAs for 25 years, providing ecological information, training and decision-support tools to reserve managers and marine spatial planners.
He lived in the USVI for several years, providing science to support ecologically meaningful management.
Dr. Pittman’s work has contributed to marine spatial planning in Hawaii, the Gulf of Maine and Oregon to help guide environmentally-informed decision-making, including planning for offshore renewable energy operations.
His current work has become more holistic, with a focus on blue urbanism and the concept of community-led marine parks for coastal cities as a spatial nexus to address multiple sustainable development targets.
He serves as a science advisor to the World Commission on Protected Areas’ Specialist Working Group on Marine Connectivity Conservation and is a core member of the University of Plymouth’s Marine and Coastal Policy Research Unit.
In Kenya, with the University of York’s Tropical Marine Research Unit, I learned about the local community-led establishment of Africa’s first marine park at Malindi in 1968 (the year I was born) and also witnessed firsthand the Kenyan Wildlife Service’s enforcement operations in action.
It is also clear that many other factors are also important in securing successful performance in MPAs, including their connectivity, context and communication.
Through the Science Council, GLORES is actively bridging the gap between science and management by applying scientifically derived criteria with which to assess and incentivize elevated performance in MPAs.

President Donald Trump once again cast doubt on human contribution to climate change and accused climate scientists of having a “political agenda” during his interview with CBS’ 60 Minutes on Sunday. “Do you still think that climate change is a hoax?”
Something’s changing and it’ll change back again,” he responded.
You don’t know,” Trump said.
He says that the Paris deal could harm the American economy and kill jobs.
Stahl pointed out to the president that his own scientists at NOAA and NASA have reported otherwise, but Trump shot back that other scientists disagree. “But what about the scientists who say it’s worse than ever?”
Although manmade climate change is supported by an overwhelming level of scientific consensus, Trump questioned their political motives.
When host Jake Tapper asked Rubio if he believed that climate change was partly caused by man, Rubio responded, “Look, scientists are saying that humanity and its behavior is contributing toward that.
Although Rubio acknowledged that sea levels are rising and ocean warming is measurable, he resisted taking large-scale climate action.

About

Finding a single source of news on niche topics can be time consuming – until now. The ContentQube Network uses “smart” technology to curate content trending on social media and search based on keywords and categories. Our content discovery engine helps readers stay updated on the latest trends, and introduces them to new publishers daily. We are a referrer to some of the biggest names in the business.

Disclaimer: All the content aggregated is for informational purposes only. The content is owned by the third parties sourced within each article, unless otherwise noted. Attribution and links to the original source are included in each article. OneQube is not responsible for the accuracy of the aforementioned content. If you are the publisher of any of this content and are not interested in the referral traffic, contact us and we will remove the article within 24 hours.